Not really. What are the Dems saying about the Bush administration and the other officials/people/issues I listed that is a complete fabrication?

Uh... how about a quick fact check, you're okay with facts, right?

The Cole was bombed on October 12th, 2000. When did Clinton leave office and what information and recommendations did his administration leave to Bush? Clinton was out of office by the end of January. The Clinton administration turned everything over to Bush and Bush did nothing. Didn't respond to the Cole, didn't react to incoming intel on Bin Laden or the other clues leading up to 9/11.

And still, you bring nothing to the conversation rather than the typical rhetoric.

How about the list you say you can generate? Let's see it. The USS Cole scored you zero points. What else do you have?

 

Wait a minute. You just got done saying that 9/11 was Bush’s fault because it happened “on his watch” even though it took years to plan and he was only in office for 8 months when it occurred. Now you’re trying to say that Clinton wasn’t at fault in any way for the attack on the USS Cole even though he was in office for a long time prior to the attack and at the time it happened. Why the double standard?

The Clinton Administration knew bin Laden was planning to carry out attacks exactly like the Cole. Osama bin Laden and members of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad appeared in a Qatar TV tape on September 22, 2000 making specific threats to attack American ships. Osama bin Laden followed through on his promise on October 12, 2000, killing 17 Americans. . . . .

Also: Two weeks before the USS Cole was attacked, Able Danger members sent out a memo warning members of the Clinton Administration, Rep. Curt Weldon, (R-PA) said Thursday. On the Sean Hannity program, Rep. Weldon said that members of the Able Danger team had also warned the former Clinton administration not to send the USS Cole to Yemen, 2 days before it was bombed, and are willing to testify to it under oath.

 

No double standard. Clinton was working on the problem, his term-ended, he turned the plans over to Bush, Bush ignored the issue completely. Pretty clear.

Uh huh. Curt Weldon. A real pillar of truth and clear thinking.

More right-wing trying to make the other side responsible.

Look Matt. We can go back and forth on the blame game. The problem is that it's all smoke (he said / she said) from the Right in the instances above. Why didn't Weldon do something with the memo when the attack happened? Uh... because he didn't know about it until someone else dreamed it up is one possible reason. Of course, it could all be true and Clinton could have wanted to see the ship attacked and people die. But why?

Remember when Bush moved into the White House and the "media" ran stories about how the offices had been trashed and file cabinets had been defecated in by the Clinton people? The same administration and media than would stoop to that would do anything to make their case. It's not that they can't do the job. It's that they HAVEN'T done the job and it's time for change.

It's like the Swift Boat Vets. What a bunch of clowns. And, even though George Bush's military record was sketchy he should have done the right thing and called those people what they were. Liars.

It's just time for change Matt. And, you'll see, it will be better.

 

Again, you want to blame Bush for not preventing 9/11 somehow because of intel you claim he had. Yet when you see that Clinton had plenty of intel prior to the attack on the Cole, instead of explaining why he did NOTHING to prevent it, you want to place the blame on Bush. If that's not a double standard, I don't know what is.

 

Don't know if someone has said this yet, if so sorry! Anyways, I've heard that the LA Times is sitting on a story about Hillary Clinton and a sex scandal involving her personal aid. Who is a woman. Supposedly this is all over Washington and kept under raps, but it is true.

Ok now I'll read the thread

---

Oh gosh lots of bickering. Anywhos, just to all let you know that usually what the previous President did in the previous term doesn't start showing up till the new President's term. Not everything that is falling apart is to blame entirely on Bush, but since this is his second term.. well you know..

As far as for my choices on the next Pres., it really depends on what they're going to be saying closer to election day. Honestly I'm not paying attention to it because its too f'king early to campaign! I won't vote for Hillary because I don't like her style of politics and her changing the record(s) of how she's voted and what she's supported in the past. I just have a strange feeling that people are going to vote for her because OMG it could be the first woman President!! I'd rather wait for a better candidate for that than her.

Since I haven't really been paying attention to all the stuff going on, I don't know why so many people are going for the Ron Paul guy. I sure as hell know I won't vote for the NM guy running, keeping reasons to myself.

Another thing why I really don't care for politics anymore is because almost all those in it are just in it for the money they make and the name they get attached to their given name. Honestly, there are lawmakers who are making laws in Cali who are making bad decisions because they've forgotten what it's like to live in that area that will be affected by their choices.

Meh. I'm gonna go eat a cookie now.

 

i was gonna take the time and actally write a good detailed argument to the bush supporters... but then i remembered that they VOTED him in, so whats the point? they did it twice and doomed my generation with this economically ignorant baboon. this oil driven puppet, and a blind donkey to the real problems...

 

Agree with you. Disagree with you. Either way, at least you're expressing your own thoughts.

 

Matt,

I understand why you say I'm running double standards. It's just that you're under the influence of liars and fabricators. The stories and info you base your stuff on has no basis in truth.

Here's a suggestion for you. Pick up a copy of Al Franken's book - "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair & Balanced Look at the Right".

I know, the title and author probably turns your stomach but... Franken doesn't just throw stories around. He takes Right-Wing garbage and breaks it down. In many cases he tells the reader how to verify what he is saying is true.

If you get through that one and want more, check out "Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot"

Then, if you're open to it, there's "The Truth! (With Jokes)"

It's not enough for someone to claim something, they need to be able to prove it on neutral grounds. No more rumors, no more inferences, just give us facts.

And, just so you know, I supported Reagan in his first term because I was in the military and liked George senior. Iran Contra woke me up. I even got behind junior after 9/11. But, once again, the lying, cheating and stealing killed my enthusiasm.

Anyway.... do some reading. Try to punch a hole in Franken's logic and reasoning.

 

bbcrud,

I want to start by saying that I have enjoyed debating many of these points with you. It’s nice to be able to have a discussion with someone (and be able to disagree) without either party getting childish and resorting to petty personal attacks. This is not personal. Heck, if I were to meet you in person we might hit it off as friends..who knows.

Now, where were we? So you think that I am “under the influence of liars and fabricators” because I agree more with the Republican Party on many issues. Yet you site your sources of information as being books written by liberal authors. The one you recommend is by a liberal comedian from SNL. If you think these people don't have an agenda, you are mistaken. And their goal is not to get to the truth about anything.

The way I see it, there are two very distinct ways to approach this political season. We can either start with a clean slate and look at each and every candidate based solely on their records, merits, and personal convictions, or we can play the partisan game. I prefer the former. You and I both have gotten a little caught up in the “my party is better than your party” garbage. That can go on forever. Neither side has done a perfect job…ever. I hope that our next President will think for himself or (God help us..herself) and not just fall into party lines. Like I said earlier in this thread, I know what’s important to me. I plan to research the candidates. If the person who strikes me as the best pick happens to be a Democrat, I will gladly vote for that person. I would hope you would do the same if you thought a Republican was the best choice. It’s way too early in the game for me to make a decision yet. I simply don’t know enough about our choices at this point. But rest assured my choice won’t be made based on party affiliation. Nor will I automatically eliminate a choice based that alone. Will you?

 

Interrupting again, can someone tell me how politics got to such a sad state of affairs where I have to chose only one of two parties, neither of which I agree with? Why is it that if I want socialized medicine I have to be anti-gun, and if I want reduced government spending I have to be anti-stem cell? WTF happened to a government by the people, for the people? Is there any way to vote for an independent and actually get them into office?

I think Stephen Colbert has done an excellent job of pointing out the fallacies of our current system. To even run as a Republican in South Carolina, a 35,000 entry fee is required, but there is no committee to validate the candidate. The Democrats only ask for 2,500 I think, but then you're reviewed as a candidate by a bunch of non-elected board members. How is it that a non-elected body can tell someone if they can even run? So much for anyone can be president if they are a natural citizen and over 35. Apparently you can't if you haven't gone to an ivy league, are already rich and didn't major in law or business.

Does anyone have information on where the candidates went to school and what their degrees were in? I'd love to vote for someone with an engineering, physics, or chemistry background simply because they have been taught to think rationally, analyze all the data, and draw their own conclusions.

 

Condi Rice '08?

 

LOL...she ain't running. I don't want anyone to misinterpret what I meant by what you quoted above. I have no problem with a woman being President of the U.S. But it would have to be the right woman. Hillary is NOT the right woman.

 

I think Condi has drifted too much to the right to be a balanced president. I'd say she was outdated, since her upbringing and schooling was based on the cold war and a militaristic Russia, but it looks like we're heading that way again.

 

I think so. I get along with my Dad fine and he's as blind as you are. KIDDING!!!

The thing about Franken's books, because you are right that he is from SNL and a comedian, is that he debunks what the right says by offering proof from verifiable sources. He actually lays out his information so the reader can verify things. It's not like Swift Boat Vets (None of which actually served with Kerry) or some of the other claims the Right makes about the Clintons. Hey, I'm not chili-red-hot about Hillary myself, but people are saying things about her they have no basis for other than fear of her winning. That's just not enough and, if we're trying to find the best person for the job regardless of party, none of us should stand for it.

I always do. I voted for Reagan his first term. My leanings are toward the Dems though. I wasted a vote on an independent candidate years ago and decided will always go with the best choice with the best chance of winning.

I've just had a harder and harder time believing that the Republican machine can generate a candidate I can trust the future of my grand-kids to. And that's the ball game as far as I'm concerned.

 

Anyone in the world is a welcome change. Someone's got to start reversing what has been destroyed in the last 7 years and make the United States respected in the world community again.

 

Man I've just giving up on our gov't, I mean here we are arguing which side is better. Why the hell are we, when it is known that both sides are playing the same game, if not for Bush some other **** clown would be destroying our "world reputation". Both republican and democrat are corrupt to the core and it seems (which it is probably true) that they are concerned with money rather than Iraqi's, Americans, constitution, etc.

Honestly I probably won't vote, because no matter what we're just going to replace one corrupt person for another. There's just no way to win.

 

Truer words were never spoken about the US...

http://www.glumbert.com/media/wakeupamerica

 

Yes there is. Vote. Get your family to vote, get your friends to vote. Ask them all to read the candidates web sites (not blogs that have agendas leaning left or right, and to vote for the persons they believe will do the best job. But ALWAYS VOTE. Checking out of the process won't make things better. Not ever.

Politicians begin to believe that we aren't plugged in and then they REALLY get into trouble. Look at all the scandals we've had since Karl Rove has been the main strategist for the Republicans. The man is a genius and he knows exactly how much citizens will put up with. He gathers all this information on how voters think and respond and gets Bush a second term. Too bad he didn't have a leash on the many people under indictment, actually sentenced to jail or otherwise bringing shame and humiliation to the Republican Party. Many of them saw how far people could be pushed and then went further. The only actual crime Rove probably orchestrated was outing that CIA agent and he had Scooter Libby all set up and ready to go to jail (which he did) so that Mr Rove wouldn't be inconvenienced by his own ideas.

In fact, we might still be in "sheeple" mode hadn't the all the other issues & scandals under this administration come to light and Karl might be moving on to his next "pet project" for President.

 

Exactly. And why we need people to start questioning everything and voting their OWN opinions.

 

But our opinions are not welcome, people that shout their opinion either get arrested and dissappear, or are assassinated, like in the past. The video of the kid asking John Kery a question and then getting arrested and tasered is a perfect example that we don't have freedom of speech and our opinions are not welcome, The gov't just tells us that we have "rights".